If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ACLU)   Dear Eric Holder; Your attempts at a federal case against George Zimmerman violates the double-jeopardy clause in the constitution and we will defend him if necessary. Sincerely - The ACLU   (aclu.org) divider line 549
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

15976 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jul 2013 at 12:34 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



549 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-21 01:13:45 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Correct me if I'm wrong, but Zimmerman wasn't tried on a civil rights violation, thus if the feds do so, it's not double jeopardy.


Wasn't he also part of a 'community watch' group? Try the biatch under the RICO Act!
 
drp
2013-07-21 01:14:11 PM

vygramul: I think it's more insane for people to champion either one of these award-winners since no one really knows what actually happened that night. Neither side is willing to accept even the HINT of a flaw. The Martin people don't think the suspicious jewelry reflects on his personality, and the Zimmerman people don't think assaulting a cop reflects on his personality. They're all insufficiently skeptical about the events of that night.


Well, the important thing is that you've found a way to feel superior to both.

/ but keep farkin' that strawchicken
 
2013-07-21 01:14:35 PM

jaytkay: Kalashinator: Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Eric Holder the brainchild behind a monumental f*ckup that involved letting guns fall into the hands of Mexican cartel members-

He borrowed Obama's time machine to start the program in 2006.


Under Bush the program was done in conjunction with the Mexican government and eventually shut down.  Under Holder they didn't bother to inform the Mexicans and expanded the program when it was reinstated.
 
2013-07-21 01:14:42 PM

DarknessTigerpaw: OPINION: If the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case were backwards (the opposite person was killed), Trayvon would already be on death row


He very well could be. And that would be wrong.
 
2013-07-21 01:14:45 PM
OH LOOK... ANOTHER REASON to LOOT and STEAL THE LATEST FLAT PANEL TVs...
 
2013-07-21 01:15:20 PM
"Name one well-adjusted teenager. Go on."

Now that's one set of extremely re-located goal posts.
 
2013-07-21 01:15:37 PM

DamnYankees: vygramul: cman: Gotta give it to the ACLU

They are principled people who put their personal opinions below what is right

Most of the time. Sometimes, they do pick and choose which rights they feel are worth defending.

Well, of course. They have a certain view as to what "civil liberties" means. What would you expect, that they defend you no matter what your case is if you walk into their office and claim its a 'civil liberties case'?



They don't defend second amendment cases and believe in far more abuse of the literal definition of it than they do other amendments. Strict constitutionalists on the 1st, 5th, etc, but not the 2nd
 
2013-07-21 01:16:25 PM

Mambo Bananapatch: Popcorn Johnny: LasersHurt: Guilty without proof, of course, like all "facts" brought up about Martin to slander him after death.

So you're denying the existence of the text messages that show Trayvon having a conversation about wanting to purchase a gun? Perhaps you should exit these threads for a while, study up on the "facts" and then give it another go. It gets really tiring having to educate people such as yourself that choose to be ignorant of what is and isn't known about this whole affair.

So stop. It doesn't matter if Martin smoked weed, said nasty things, wanted a gun, or was a Mexican drug cartel kingpin. All Zimmerman knew about him that night was that he was a stranger. That was enough for him to "investigate".


...he said oversimplifyingly. You're forgetting one major thing: There had been a crime wave in that area. Robberies. All suspects were young black males. If Zimmerman was profiling, he had every right to do so.

Let me ask you something. If there had been previous reports of a pervert spotted in your neighborhood and you happen to catch a stranger sitting on a bench at the playground wearing a trenchcoat and sunglasses, wouldn't be at least a little concerned? Maybe concerned enough to ask him who he was?
 
2013-07-21 01:16:28 PM

Mambo Bananapatch: Popcorn Johnny: LasersHurt: Guilty without proof, of course, like all "facts" brought up about Martin to slander him after death.

So you're denying the existence of the text messages that show Trayvon having a conversation about wanting to purchase a gun? Perhaps you should exit these threads for a while, study up on the "facts" and then give it another go. It gets really tiring having to educate people such as yourself that choose to be ignorant of what is and isn't known about this whole affair.

So stop. It doesn't matter if Martin smoked weed, said nasty things, wanted a gun, or was a Mexican drug cartel kingpin. All Zimmerman knew about him that night was that he was a stranger. That was enough for him to "investigate".


It just provides mud to sling at Martin for not being perfect. Zimmerman's done crap but that doesn't provide ammo for his lawyer. There was enough evidence of bad behavior from both individuals to start a fight. Although Martin likely started it either in hopes to act tough or out of paranoia from some stranger following him.
 
2013-07-21 01:16:35 PM
 
2013-07-21 01:17:00 PM
I'd much rather see an investigation into all of the crimes Obama was committing 35 years ago.
 
2013-07-21 01:18:24 PM

Popcorn Johnny: I'd much rather see an investigation into all of the crimes Obama was committing 35 years ago.


Such as what? Smoking doobies?
 
2013-07-21 01:18:26 PM
When has Eric Holder ever given a shiat about our rights, or the laws of the land? He needs to be in jail.
 
2013-07-21 01:18:34 PM

Popcorn Johnny: fnordfocus: He was charged before they realized Daddy was a judge.

This is what Team Trayvon actually believes. For the record, he was a magistrate in Virginia, not a judge.


That's about as stupid as when a certain Fark cop said that a constable wasn't a Police Officer even though he had a badge and arrest powers.

Magistrates in Virginia issue warrants, decide bail, etc.  These are things that are handled by people called "Judges" in other states, and that's enough to get a bit of professional courtesy for your kid.
 
2013-07-21 01:18:58 PM

xanadian: George was acquitted.  Let it go man, coz it's GONE.

 
2013-07-21 01:19:02 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Correct me if I'm wrong, but Zimmerman wasn't tried on a civil rights violation, thus if the feds do so, it's not double jeopardy.


Yes, it would be allowed under the "separate sovereign" exemption to double jeopardy. However, this exemption is controversial, and has historically been regarded as unjust by civil liberties groups like the ACLU. Many people would like to see the issue brought up again in the Supreme Court.
 
2013-07-21 01:19:30 PM
Dear World,
If Trayvon did not get himself suspended from school, he would probably be alive today.
If Trayvon had just gone home, he would probably be alive today.
If Trayvon had not assaulted George Zimmerman he would probably be alive today.

Regards,
HS
 
2013-07-21 01:19:46 PM
Dear ACLU, please look up the definition of "sovereign."
 
2013-07-21 01:19:54 PM

Popcorn Johnny: I'd much rather see an investigation into all of the crimes Obama was committing 35 years ago.


img837.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-21 01:19:58 PM

biffstallion: OH LOOK... ANOTHER REASON to LOOT and STEAL THE LATEST FLAT PANEL TVs...


You need a reason? I just want to watch the world burn.
 
2013-07-21 01:20:31 PM

HectorSchwartz: Dear World,
If Trayvon did not get himself suspended from school, he would probably be alive today.
If Trayvon had just gone home, he would probably be alive today.
If Trayvon had not assaulted George Zimmerman he would probably be alive today.

Regards,
HS


If any of them decided to stop for a sandwich, he'd be alive today. The unfortunate thing is, he isn't.
 
2013-07-21 01:20:34 PM

hardinparamedic: Nabb1: Better a "Twilight" fan than a delusional fan that treats a dead sociopath like a teen heart throb.

I never knew that Trayvon Martin was your patient for you to diagnose him with a psychiatric condition. Why didn't you speak up before this tragic incident? You're the real monster here.

Stop pretending there are any heroes in this situation.


There are no heroes , only victims.. poor decisions were made by both.. human beings do that occasionally.. my condolences to all involved, may we become wiser in the future.
 
2013-07-21 01:21:07 PM
So after the Feds Zimm will have Judy and then Wopner and then Simon.
 
2013-07-21 01:21:13 PM

TerminalEchoes: Mambo Bananapatch: Popcorn Johnny: LasersHurt: Guilty without proof, of course, like all "facts" brought up about Martin to slander him after death.

So you're denying the existence of the text messages that show Trayvon having a conversation about wanting to purchase a gun? Perhaps you should exit these threads for a while, study up on the "facts" and then give it another go. It gets really tiring having to educate people such as yourself that choose to be ignorant of what is and isn't known about this whole affair.

So stop. It doesn't matter if Martin smoked weed, said nasty things, wanted a gun, or was a Mexican drug cartel kingpin. All Zimmerman knew about him that night was that he was a stranger. That was enough for him to "investigate".

...he said oversimplifyingly. You're forgetting one major thing: There had been a crime wave in that area. Robberies. All suspects were young black males. If Zimmerman was profiling, he had every right to do so.

Let me ask you something. If there had been previous reports of a pervert spotted in your neighborhood and you happen to catch a stranger sitting on a bench at the playground wearing a trenchcoat and sunglasses, wouldn't be at least a little concerned? Maybe concerned enough to ask him who he was?


Yes.

Of course, comparing a guy in a trench coat studying children at a playground to a guy walking home would be silly. A better comparison would be if the guy was not wearing a trench coat and leering at children, or otherwise behaving in any way unusually, but just walking past the playground, in which case, no, I would not.
 
2013-07-21 01:21:39 PM
No they don't,  Mcveigh was charged at both the federal and state level.

The federal charges are stupid and have no basis in reality but they are not unconstitutional.
 
2013-07-21 01:21:41 PM

ponger: SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Popcorn Johnny: Holder and Obama are incompetent, race baiting morons. Stand your ground and race had not a farking thing to do with the Zim case and yet there they are on TV talking about both of them every chance they get.

Stand your ground had nothing to do with it? You're dumb.

Actually the jury did receive instruction to the effect Zim could stand his ground.  So to that extent "Stand Your Ground" did have something to do with the case.  However, the prosecution and defense lawyers both had a hand in writing the instructions to the jury.  So it goes.

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/153354467/George-Zimmerman-Trial-Final-Ju ry- Instructions

page 12

"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent
the commission of a forcible felony. "


Except that even in the absence of SYG, the defense could have argued equally with merit that this was justifiable homicide. If Zimmerman was indeed on the ground getting his head bashed into the concrete, it wasn't as if he could further retreat into the ground.
 
2013-07-21 01:22:05 PM
Yet another black  man chimed in in the editorial section of my newspaper this morning.
His idea: We need to meet at public libraries and have a dialogue on slavery, segregation and Jim Crow.
Sorry, that sounds more like a monologue.
 
2013-07-21 01:22:38 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Kome: One of the jurors said it was a factor influencing her decision in spite of it not being brought up by the lawyers.

That doesn't make it a part of the case. We know for a fact that it didn't apply to Zim's actions, as he was pinned to the ground and unable to flee. Any speculation that Trayvon was standing his ground is not supported by any evidence.

Obama and Holder going on TV and denouncing stand your ground laws when there's not one shred of evidence that they had anything to do with the incident is moronic.


You're equivocating. Yes, stand your ground was not brought up by the lawyers, meaning it wasn't part of the prosecution or defense strategy. But because a member of the jury, when interviewed, invoked it as part of her decision making process, it became part of the case. Just a part that no one can do anything about for that case.
 
2013-07-21 01:23:11 PM

fnordfocus: Magistrates in Virginia issue warrants, decide bail, etc.  These are things that are handled by people called "Judges" in other states, and that's enough to get a bit of professional courtesy for your kid.


Judges preside over trials, magistrates do not. Aside from that, if you think that a magistrate from Virginia could call Florida and get an assault on an officer charge dropped, you're nuts. The case was thrown out because of the evidence, that Zim had no idea he was grabbing an officer.
 
2013-07-21 01:23:57 PM

RexTalionis: We are writing to clearly state the ACLU's position on whether or not the Department of Justice (DOJ) should consider bringing federal civil rights or hate crimes charges as a result of the state court acquittal in the George Zimmerman case. Even though the Supreme Court permits a federal prosecution following a state prosecution, the ACLU believes the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Constitution protects someone from being prosecuted in another court for charges arising from the same transaction.


In other words: "Even though the Supreme Court said we're wrong, we're choosing to believe in our interpretation of the Constitution."


Because it is the correct one.

/Zimm got away with manslaughter.
//You go, ACLU.
 
2013-07-21 01:24:55 PM
i466.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-21 01:25:02 PM

Jeep2011: Hopefully, the ACLU position will cause the crazies heads to explode and we will be done with crazy.


This. Would be nice.
 
2013-07-21 01:25:50 PM

RexTalionis: In other words: "Even though the Supreme Court said we're wrong, we're choosing to believe in our interpretation of the Constitution."


Why not, everyone seems to have their own interpretation of the Constitution these days.
 
2013-07-21 01:25:56 PM
2.bp.blogspot.com

Yeah, Obama was really struggling with racial prejudice 35 years ago.  What a farkin' hack.
 
2013-07-21 01:26:03 PM

hardinparamedic: biffstallion: OH LOOK... ANOTHER REASON to LOOT and STEAL THE LATEST FLAT PANEL TVs...

You need a reason? I just want to watch the world burn.


Some people....
 
2013-07-21 01:26:15 PM

Popcorn Johnny: The case was thrown out because of the evidence, that Zim had no idea he was grabbing an officer.


LOL you're joking, right? You know ignorance is no excuse, right? If you assualt an off duty cop, you've still assualted (and will be prosecuted for) assualting a police officer.

Note, I'm not saying you're lying, I just find your version difficult to believe, and...well, you're a goddamned troll.
 
2013-07-21 01:26:34 PM

RexTalionis: In other words: "Even though the Supreme Court said we're wrong, we're choosing to believe in our interpretation of the Constitution."


The ACLU  is woefully wont to do that on occasion. It's one of the reasons I don't really support them much, any more. Case in point, see the ACLU's tantrum in response to Heller which made no goddamn sense whatsoever.
 
2013-07-21 01:27:23 PM
Why no spiffy tag?

Seriously though, he will be put in jail, because that is what America is all about.
 
2013-07-21 01:27:26 PM

SithLord: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 400x383]

Yeah, Obama was really struggling with racial prejudice 35 years ago.  What a farkin' hack.


jealous much?
 
2013-07-21 01:27:39 PM
Screw the aclu! When I was assaulted by police for no reason they did nothing but send me a letter stating their resources are limited and advised me to get an attorney on my own. They do nothing for the little guy.
 
2013-07-21 01:27:49 PM

lantawa: Some people....


sharetv.org

ARE YOU KIDDING? I'M CRAZY ENOUGH TO TAKE ON BATMAN, BUT NOT CRAZY ENOUGH TO MESS WITH THE IRS!
 
2013-07-21 01:28:08 PM

cman: Gotta give it to the ACLU

They are principled people who put their personal opinions below what is right


Image a world where we replaced the justice department with the ACLU... you know, people with principles?

Thumbs up for the ACLU.  I don't give 2 shiats about Zimmerman or the kid he killed (and neither, consequently should you... wasting time and energy forming opinions on inane random social happenings half a country away is about as productive as watching American Idol ... bread and circuses, oh how we haz them), but these are the kinds of people I actually want running the country.  Wouldn't we all be better off if folks could step outside their ideologies and do their damn jobs?

Holder is worse than worthless, he's actually damaging to society.  Seriously, Janet Reno was a trainwreck (and John Ashcroft was farking insane), but Holder is such a shill its almost comedic.... or it would be if he wasn't in a position of real power.  He's so busy sucking dick on Wall Street, I'm kind of surprised he came up for air long enough to even be bothered.
 
2013-07-21 01:28:24 PM
Moral of the story -- don't shoot this guy:

images.travelpod.com
 
2013-07-21 01:28:40 PM

that bosnian sniper: RexTalionis: In other words: "Even though the Supreme Court said we're wrong, we're choosing to believe in our interpretation of the Constitution."

The ACLU  is woefully wont to do that on occasion. It's one of the reasons I don't really support them much, any more. Case in point, see the ACLU's tantrum in response to Heller which made no goddamn sense whatsoever.


Yeah, see Scott v. Sanford. Why would you disagree with SCOTUS?
 
2013-07-21 01:29:00 PM
As the American people argue over a case already determined by a jury, it takes the focus away from:

Benghazi and four dead Americans
The IRS
The NSA
The Patriot Act
NDAA
The Federal Reserve's QE3  propping up the stock market
Congresspersons tacking on pork to various bills, etc.


Keep arguing, people. It's just what our overlords (and the media) were hoping for.
 
2013-07-21 01:29:28 PM

Plant Rights Activist: [img2.timeinc.net image 300x400]
hey guys, whats going on in this thread


A criminal suit and a civil suit are not the same thing and is not double jeopardy.
 
2013-07-21 01:29:33 PM

SithLord: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 400x383]

Yeah, Obama was really struggling with racial prejudice 35 years ago.  What a farkin' hack.


I don't think racists would give a shiat 35 years ago if he was half-white and raised in a good background. They just look to the skin color and then roll with it. I wouldn't be surprised if he got targeted.
 
2013-07-21 01:29:44 PM

RexTalionis: In other words: "Even though the Supreme Court said we're wrong, we're choosing to believe in our interpretation of the Constitution."


This has been a long time coming, and I personally know a number of conservative judges who have been waiting for the appropriate case to change this law. Just because the Supreme Court said it works one way a few decades ago, doesn't mean they got it right.

That said, this wouldn't be the right test case in my opinion.
 
2013-07-21 01:30:33 PM
I just don't know why they're doing it. The feds (FBI) already investigated and found nothing. Oh that's right, they set up a tip line specifically for Zimmerman. I'm sure that will generate tons of truthful stories from people that no one else could seem to find.
 
2013-07-21 01:30:40 PM

DamnYankees: vygramul: cman: Gotta give it to the ACLU

They are principled people who put their personal opinions below what is right

Most of the time. Sometimes, they do pick and choose which rights they feel are worth defending.

Well, of course. They have a certain view as to what "civil liberties" means. What would you expect, that they defend you no matter what your case is if you walk into their office and claim its a 'civil liberties case'?


I have an old friend who had her public nudity/obscenity case defended by the ACLU and she had to work pretty hard to get them to take the case but once they did they were pretty rabid defenders. She was acquitted and was always thankful for their free help. Yes they are picky about which cases they take and sometimes take rather hopeless cases but left or right wing everyone should be happy that there are people like this who are willing to fight the government tooth and nail no matter how hopeless the case.
 
Displayed 50 of 549 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report